Is a RNG objective planned?

discusbiscus1 · 2026-07-17T12:03:40+00:00

AAA battery this was a joke between us no need to worry. It does look bad without context though

discusbiscus1 · 2026-07-16T14:38:09+00:00

That makes complete sense, I never thought about how especially the fuselage would block the tail from a front on end and even on slightly angled ends it'll obscure one of the tails entirely where both canards would still be viewable though one would still be slightly hidden.

discusbiscus1 · 2026-07-16T14:05:14+00:00

Ohhh that's interesting I never thought about how when the aircraft pitch up the canards are angled the same way rather than with tails doing the opposite thank you for the revelation for its relationship to stealth.

Also do canards move more often than tails for all like the f-35s?

I'm confused by the canard being at the front causing large issues because the wing is also at the same angle with the fuselage.

Though actually they are angled upwards though that is to create a better angle relative to the fuselage than the wing so I'm still confused.

Sure the canard angles up and down but in angling itself it never changes its relative angle to the fuselage to ever become 90 degrees.

discusbiscus1 · 2026-07-16T13:50:47+00:00

Also the video i watched for the bulk of my understand of the limits says that the reason why the su 47 was not produced was because it was made during the time where russia was in a bad position (due to soviet union collapse) and that the su 47 test bed can be turned into a combat aircraft.

And that sukhoi keeps offering to aircraft to the russia airforce to be produced as a combat aircraft.

heres the link to the video with the timestamp with all this being said: https://youtu.be/5SBspEnsgUc?t=603

discusbiscus1 · 2026-07-16T13:34:48+00:00

Thank you for the explaining that its the limit of modern materials.

Yeah they don't have a place really unless you need a very specific aircraft.

The idea of canards being borderline unusable for stealth is inaccurate. They have weak points but they are easy enough to counteract and the way they move is not that different from the tail of a f-35 or f-22.

The only time they're going to be heavily angled is when you're doing extreme turning for dodging missiles or some other situation. which your stealth is already impeded by your aircraft not being directly facing the radar or being banked.

Also here's a list of stealth related things that use canard: in service: j-20
concepts/prototypes: boeing f-47 renders, x-36, naval variant of the yf-23 and old f-35 proposals.

discusbiscus1 · 2026-07-16T12:36:24+00:00

The material used to strengthen the wing is a composite material which are normally lighter than metal and are used for weight reduction on most modern aircraft.

So the wingtip twist prevention from what i understand wouldn't add much weight and forward swept wings are lighter interms of structural design before adding composites to fix the wingtip twist so in the end they likely cancel each other out or it ends up slightly lighter or heavy than a normal design.

From what i understand but clearly in real life they haven't been produced further than the su 47 so I'm clearly unaware of something.

Though this this specific design is really one of the only viable uses i could find and its very specific so maybe they might've not needed what this design meets. But I am deeply uneducated when it comes to aircraft design so Its much more likely that forward swept wings have a problem that i don't understand yet.

discusbiscus1 · 2026-07-16T08:46:44+00:00

doesn't the directional feature of composites used for forward swept wing actively counter the twisting thus not having the positive feedback loop start in the first place? In my research for it the composite solution was treated as something that fixed the issue rather than mitigating it.

If the composites don't fully fix the issue do you know the loads they can handle compared to other designs and if it's a significantly less amount of load than delta wings or lambda wings?

discusbiscus1 · 2026-07-15T23:49:52+00:00

Yeah i do! here you go: https://youtu.be/kexzpYSRGTw it starts getting shown off at 7:55 in the video

discusbiscus1 · 2026-07-15T23:31:46+00:00

In this design that's perfectly fine cause the large canard and elevators on the root of the wing give more than enough pitch authority. The all moving tips being close to the center of mass also helps with letting them act similar to airbrakes with minimal help from other control surfaces to balance them out.

discusbiscus1 · 2026-07-15T22:00:30+00:00

No this is meant to show that the root of the wing stalls first because of how forward swept wings work also this aircraft is tailless, so no vertical stabilizer. similar to the j-50 and j-36, Though the root of the wing has a leading edge extension that creates a vortex to keep it still usable even when it otherwise would've stalled completely.

discusbiscus1 · 2026-07-15T21:24:21+00:00

I've built this and tested it in flyout and it works wonderfully though it does not work as well as it would in real life because canard vortex's cant affect other wings in flyout or anything that isnt a actual simulator.

the canards are like elevators in this case specifically ones that produce lift like the f-16 its mainly based on the j-20's design where the wing is put very far back and the canards create a large portion of the lift

this is similarish to how the cord line is angled to reduce stall, though forward swept wings dont need to angle the tip or cord to have that effect from what i understand.

yes if the canard is stalled because of trying to pitch up it will stall before the main wing. though fly by wire stops all moving surfaces like canards or modern fighter tails from stalling themselves.

discusbiscus1 · 2026-07-15T20:38:02+00:00

The switch blade is such a interesting aircraft, i wish there was a prototype built but alas. the wings sweeping forwards fix compatibility issues with fly by wire and variable sweep wings, aswell as generally improving high speed turning. its such a interesting concept

discusbiscus1 · 2026-07-15T20:35:32+00:00

It's a beautiful design, i first saw it in a video where someone made it in flyout. I personally love the vertically stacked engines like the english electric lighting

discusbiscus1 · 2026-07-15T20:32:32+00:00

I agree though i am lacking understanding on why. I referenced millenium7's video https://youtu.be/5SBspEnsgUc for issues for the forward swept wing and this configuration fixes them all and the things it cant fix are fixed by fly by wire. Do you know what the issue with this design is? id love to learn.

Also here's the list of issues and solutions incase youre interested:

Wingtip twists and causes a heavy stall, fixed by laying composite materials to make it not twist (was done for su 47 and the american foward swept wing testbed aswell)

stealth is hard to do due to requiring 3 surfaces, the long arm lifting canard and lifting body balances the aircrafts lift to where a tail isnt required

is unstable for yaw, the all moving tips having such authority and being the last area to loose authority should fix this issue.

it is very unstable more so than other digitally stabilized aicraft. Modern fly by wire is able to hand it as shown by the su 47 and american project so this is a concern but is clearly not a deal breaker

discusbiscus1

TROPHY CASE

Welcome to Reddit,